11-17-2018, 01:17 PM | #11 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Pacheco, California
|
Re: Skarg's clarification house rule wording for Combat Options
How do you know that you are being shot at?
Here's my fix: http://www.hcobb.com/tft/house_rules.html#Defend
__________________
-HJC Last edited by hcobb; 11-17-2018 at 01:49 PM. |
11-17-2018, 02:54 PM | #12 |
Join Date: Mar 2018
|
Re: Skarg's clarification house rule wording for Combat Options
OK -- In a drastic turnabout from decades of play -- I agree it feels less gamey if Dodge is locked-in at the end of the figure's movement. And if you don't declare Dodge then, it also feels gamey to choose it later. That's because dodging would have happened (or not) during movement, and so deciding whether you dodged or not after movement feels like going back in time.
But I'll stand up for our play of Defend. In the context of a 5 second turn and cut and thrust of action, I can easily imagine taking a defensive stance based on what the attacker is trying to do. So I prefer that Defend is not locked in. Re: the attacker-choice or defender-choice in the above context of Defend, I can easily imagine that both the target can take a defensive stance (or not) based on what the attacker is trying to do, and that the attacker can push the attack (or not) based on what the target is doing. So I'm happy with attacker-choice there, but admittedly haven't really thought about defender-choice. |
11-17-2018, 03:19 PM | #14 |
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: London Uk, but originally from Scotland
|
Re: Skarg's clarification house rule wording for Combat Options
This is the one aspect of the rules I really wish they had cleared up for the new edition. Unfortunately Dodge/Defend don't actually fit properly into the system as it stands.
Each option has two parts: 1. Movement phase. This is regulated by initiative roll and MA, plus engagement status. 2. Action phase. This is regulated by AdjDX and engagement status. From the example of play in Melee and Steve's own comments on these forums, it seems the intention is that Dodge/Defend occur outwith the AdjDX paradigm of the Action phase. That's certainly the way we always played, although it's not what the rules actually say. That being the case, unless we accept that Dodge/Defend somehow sit outwith the entire structure of the rules, the only logical conclusion is that they are part of the Movement phase. Therefore, you declare you are dodging or defending as you move and are thus "locked-in" to that for the turn. I actually don't think this is unreasonable. As an archer, I can clearly see if someone is making themselves hard to shoot; they're crouching and zig-zagging etc. So I choose an easier target. Similarly, if I face an opponent in Melee who is adopting a very defensive stance and attitude, I may decide not to waste time attacking them but to wait for an opening or atttack someone else. |
11-18-2018, 03:03 AM | #15 | |
Join Date: Mar 2018
|
Re: Skarg's clarification house rule wording for Combat Options
Quote:
We have always treated Dodge the same way, but I will see if I can convince them to experiment with making Dodge happen (or not) during movement, and see how it goes. Avoid the "time-travelling" effect. |
|
11-18-2018, 03:08 AM | #16 | |||
Join Date: Mar 2018
|
Re: Skarg's clarification house rule wording for Combat Options
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
It seems to me like Defend and Dodge clearly fall outside the adjDX sequence used for all other actions. In a way, the pages of forum discussion about these options speaks to that! In Advanced Melee, there is no lock-in, you can clearly switch to Dodge and Defend during the action phase, as long as you meet the move requirements (p 4 changing options). Unfortunately, there are just enough changes from AM to the new TFT (eg as Skarg has noted many times, REMOVING the clarifying "Changing Options" section above!) that it isn't clear whether SJ's intention was to introduce significant changes in the new TFT re Dodge/Defend, or is this just "translation error". |
|||
11-18-2018, 04:18 AM | #17 |
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: London Uk, but originally from Scotland
|
Re: Skarg's clarification house rule wording for Combat Options
The problem with allowing figures to choose Defend/Dodge when their turn to act comes is that they will then be governed by AdjDX order. This means that the options become almost useless to lower DX figures. I'm sure Steve mentioned somewhere on these forums that that's not the way he plays, but unfortunately it's what the rules say.
Like I say, I just wished they'd cleared this up for the new edition. Perhaps Steve is very clear in his own mind what the rules intend, but unfortunately many of the rest of us are not. |
11-18-2018, 11:24 AM | #18 | |
Join Date: May 2015
|
Re: Skarg's clarification house rule wording for Combat Options
I don't see any realism reason to think someone can't choose to respond to a ranged attack by dodging. The point about ranged attackers surveying and picking targets who are not dodging seems best represented by picking committed targets - i.e. people who can't dodge because they moved over 1/2 MA, took another action, are facing away, or otherwise prevented by circumstances. If a shooter wants to pick between several opponents who have not committed yet, the shooter can use Delayed Actions to wait until they do pick an action (which I also think is needed, because the person trying to choose a non-dodging target should have to wait for the targets who are still able to dodge, and not be able to do it as soon as if they just fire as soon as they can.
Quote:
|
|
11-19-2018, 04:32 AM | #19 |
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: London Uk, but originally from Scotland
|
Re: Skarg's clarification house rule wording for Combat Options
It's clearly laid out in the rules. I'll just pick out the key bits:
ITL p101. Turn Sequencing and Options..."during each turn, each figure may execute one "option" from the list below. Each option consists of a movement, attack, defence or other combination...." ITL page 102. "During combat events follow a strict sequence. Each turn goes through these stages. 1) Roll for Initiative 2) Renew Spells 3) Movement. "The first player to move chooses one option....and executes the movement part.." 4) Actions. "All attacks, spell casting, attempts to disbelieve, etc., are carried out. Figures act in order of adjDX." So it's very clear that EVERYTHING that happens other than Movement is an "Action" and is governed by adjDX. It makes no difference whether you change options - the sequencing is governed by the strict rules detailed above. And that is why I have a problem with Dodge and Defend in the RAW. |
11-19-2018, 06:36 AM | #20 |
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: London Uk, but originally from Scotland
|
Re: Skarg's clarification house rule wording for Combat Options
Reading further in the new edition I notice the addition of a very interesting word, which did not appear previously:
Options (C) Dodge. Move up to half its MA while dodging. The word "while" is new and implies that the action of dodging occurs during movement. Unfortunately, the word does not occur with The Defend option. I don't know if the addition of the word was carefully considered or accidental. |
|
|